6 ms·

Displayport 1.4 is a standard for socket and cable, so it will transfer 4K 120Hz. Advantages over other standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Ad

Displayport 1.4 is a standard for socket and cable, so it will transfer 4K 120Hz. Advantages over other standards: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DVI.2C_VGA_and_FPD-Link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#Advantages_over_DV... Also, another major advantage - USB Type-C compatibility (http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/ http://www.displayport.org/what-is-displayport-over-usb-c/)

bawana 10y ago
Why didn't video cables go optical? Like toslink did w audio?
- tormeh 10y ago
  Latency and cost, probably.
  - Dylan16807 10y ago
    What latency?
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      Electric to light to electric would add latency perhaps? Random guess
      - Dylan16807 10y ago
        It wouldn't, not at the scale of inter-device cables.
- nl 10y ago
  No advantage. It's still all wires inside the computer and the monitor.
  - chillydawg 10y ago
    Yes, but inside the computer you have the luxury of static, pre-calculated track layouts that optimise for latency, noise and general integrity. A general purpose, variable length, high bandwidth cable and connectors is a much harder problem, thus the kind of issues we see here sending raw video signals of extremely high fidelity between card and monitor.
- stevep98 10y ago
  Thunderbolt was supposed to go optical. You can read about it here, under "Copper vs. optical": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
  - seanp2k2 10y ago
    USB3 was also supposed to have fiber components. Really hard to find references for this online since at CES 2008 they showed the connectors without any optical stuff, but I found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ Anyone know why they didn't end up going optical + copper for USB3?
- Matthias247 10y ago
  There are lots of options for optical cabling (e.g. cheap plastic fibers vs. glass fibers) and all have different tradeoffs, e.g. available bandwidth vs. cost. However from what I've seen basically all options are more expensive then equivalent electrical connections (we use both optical and electrical networks in cars). A major advantage of optical is that there are no EMV problems and that you are electrically decoupled (e.g. no hum loops). This might be one of the reasons why toslink is optical. For displays ground loops are typically no problem compared to amplifiers/speakers.

bawana 10y ago

Why didn't video cables go optical? Like toslink did w audio?

tormeh 10y ago
Latency and cost, probably.
- Dylan16807 10y ago
  What latency?
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    Electric to light to electric would add latency perhaps? Random guess
    - Dylan16807 10y ago
      It wouldn't, not at the scale of inter-device cables.
nl 10y ago
No advantage. It's still all wires inside the computer and the monitor.
- chillydawg 10y ago
  Yes, but inside the computer you have the luxury of static, pre-calculated track layouts that optimise for latency, noise and general integrity. A general purpose, variable length, high bandwidth cable and connectors is a much harder problem, thus the kind of issues we see here sending raw video signals of extremely high fidelity between card and monitor.
stevep98 10y ago
Thunderbolt was supposed to go optical. You can read about it here, under "Copper vs. optical": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)
- seanp2k2 10y ago
  USB3 was also supposed to have fiber components. Really hard to find references for this online since at CES 2008 they showed the connectors without any optical stuff, but I found this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/19/idf_usb_3_announced/ Anyone know why they didn't end up going optical + copper for USB3?
Matthias247 10y ago
There are lots of options for optical cabling (e.g. cheap plastic fibers vs. glass fibers) and all have different tradeoffs, e.g. available bandwidth vs. cost. However from what I've seen basically all options are more expensive then equivalent electrical connections (we use both optical and electrical networks in cars). A major advantage of optical is that there are no EMV problems and that you are electrically decoupled (e.g. no hum loops). This might be one of the reasons why toslink is optical. For displays ground loops are typically no problem compared to amplifiers/speakers.